Pages

Current Giveaways!

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Virtual Author Book Tours: Guest Post by Ben Kane

Today I'm very excited to have Ben Kane, author of Spartacus, here to A Bookish Affair to talk about gladiators! Thanks for coming, Ben!

The word ‘gladiator’ conjures up an image for just about everyone. Usually, it’s a man – KirkDouglas, Russell Crowe or Andy Whitfield. Sometimes it’s a murmillo, a man wearing a fish-crested helmet with armour on one arm, or a retiarius, a net-fighter with a trident. Whatever theimage, it’s impossible to deny that ‘gladiator’ is one of the most recognizable words from ancienttimes. That in itself is a remarkable thing. What I’d like to explore in this short piece is how ourmodern thinking about gladiators can sometimes be at polar opposites to their purpose morethan two thousand years ago.

Although it’s likely that gladiator fights were taking place earlier, the first documented evidencethat we have of them is in 264 BC. At this time, and for generations afterwards, the main purposeof gladiatorial contests was not to entertain the masses, but to honour the dead. Trained fighterswould take each other in so-called munera (singular: munus) as part of the offerings to the memoryof deceased rich and famous Romans. Other, more popular, forms of public entertainment tookplace as part of either the many religious festivals/holidays, or in the public games which wereheld to celebrate the military victories won by Rome’s generals. Processions, theater productionsand chariot-racing were hugely popular as part of the feriae. Spectacles involving animals werecommon too. These morphed over time to grander presentations with large and exotic animalssuch as bears, bulls, lions and tigers etc.

It’s clear that the early munera in which gladiators fought served not just to raise the profileof the deceased. They also aggrandized the reputations of the families involved and moreimportantly, of the individuals who were paying for the contests. Gladiator fights soon becameso popular that each subsequent munus had to be bigger, better and grander than the onesthat had gone before. For an analogy, one only has to think of how the opening and closingceremonies of modern-day Olympics are compared to the previous games. By the first centuryBC, the original purpose of the munera had been so eroded that it was commonplace for themto be held long after the death of the person in whose honour they were being held. Theirenormous popularity with the Roman public had ensured that they were being held ever morefrequently. Now, they were staged when it was politically advantageous for the sponsor. So itwas, in 65 BC, twenty years after the death of his father, Julius Caesar held a magnificent munus,with 320 pairs of gladiators who used silver weapons.

Octavian/Augustus, Caesar’s successor and the first emperor, shrewdly saw how important thegladiatorial contests had become, and how significant a political tool they were. By 22 BC, he hadbrought them under imperial control, a situation that was to remain in place for generations. Sowhat made these highly-trained, often well-paid, fighters so attractive? To try and understandthe likely answer it is necessary to forget our modern sensibilities and our sense of ‘fair play’. Inancient Rome, it was commonplace to shed blood, either animal or human. Historically, this wasdone to offer tribute to those who had passed away. It was also done to win the goodwill of thegods, or to avert their displeasure, and to avert disaster in times of crisis (reference the large-scalemunera after the disastrous Roman defeat at Cannae in 216 BC). In other words, it was normal tosee sacrifices in everyday life. We can go further and say that bleeding hearts were rare, or even

non-existent, in ancient Rome. Pity – in Latin, misericordia ― was thought to be unmanly, while itsclose relation, clemency or clementia ― a rational rather than emotional reaction ― was not.

The type of men who became gladiators also bears reflection. They were the lowest of thelow: prisoners-of-war, criminals and slaves ― non-citizens, who had no rights under Romanlaw. Forcing them to fight before thousands of spectators was a public statement of thegrandest kind. It reiterated the magnificence of Rome’s military victories, made the punishmentof wrongdoers a communal, intimate and affair. The bloody message delivered in the mostuncompromising of ways was that opposition to Rome would never be tolerated, would be metwith the most savage retribution.

While gladiators occupied the lowest rung of Roman society’s ladder, they were also respectedand even admired. The gladiatorial vow, which promised to endure the most terrible ofpunishments and ultimately, death itself, was the most sacred oath anyone in Rome could make.By agreeing to suffer such a fate, the gladiator’s disreputable status faded into the background,allowing honour to return to his life ― and in some cases, death.

In conclusion, it is possible to say that gladiators did not just provide gory entertainment. Theyhad many roles in ancient Rome. These included: offering tribute to the dead. Making requestsof the gods. Acting as a tool to increase politicians’ popularity. Proving that resistance to Romewould meet with only one outcome and that lawbreakers would be punished. Satisfying thecitizens that law and order would prevail. Securing the positions of those in power.

My Badges

About Me

I have always loved to read. I decided to get into book blogging to share the books I love with other fellow readers! For any questions, comments, concerns or just to chat, shoot me an email at abookishaffair(at)gmail(dot)com ! I usually respond to emails quickly!
All opinions on this blog are my own, regardless of where I got the book!